As I sat for an early dinner with my friend the manager of a boutique hotel in Tel Aviv, I wondered why she was so glum. Our last conversation was just before the elections so I was sure that she would be pleased with the unprecedented victory of Yair Lapid. After all, he had trumpeted easing the burden on the middle classes and an equaling of that burden across the board. Israelis were so tired of not being able to afford housing and a decent style of living despite high levels of education and good jobs…”It’s simple, she said: Lapid has betrayed us.”

I hadn’t really kept up with the news and the budget. I was shocked.

“If his ridiculous tax for tourists goes through, it is the end of our hotel. We cater to the middle class tourists. If we add 17% to our prices, the average tourist who stays with us will be pushed away. Even if we are a great hotel destination in Tel Aviv, we have built our reputation on service and affordability. If we are no longer affordable, we will lose our guests and have to close down. It’s as simple as that.” I sheepishly inquired what the profit margin was for the hotel and was astonished to find it so very marginal.

It was only then that I began to to understand that our Diaspora middle class reality is not the same reality lived by the shrinking middle classes in Israel. Theirs is a highly precarious state. It surprised me to know how little it would take for someone as industrious, as creative, as patriotic to go under financially while raising a young family. “And what would I do? I might have to think about going elsewhere. I won’t raise my children in poverty.”

It was also then that I remembered a talk I gave at a synagogue not too long ago on the nature of the sacrifices Israelis make on all sorts of levels.

We, in the Diaspora, often have idealistic and romantic versions of Israel. After all, when most of us visit, we do so on guided tours and see the incredible beauty, the intensity of life, the ability to live Jewishly without recrimination, the remarkable combination of the ultra-modern and the ancient. We see a diverse people who have created and sustained a thriving Western democracy, the “start-up nation”, a country whose army is vaunted, whose values we can appreciate and admire.

What we don’t often see is the true cost of living in Israel. The constant stresses.

We hear about protests when the price of cottage cheese increases. We hear about well educated young people not being able to afford decent housing…but it is really hard for those of us living on a tight but manageable middle class budget to imagine. What’s worse, we rarely, if ever, add the cost of living to the sacrifices that all Israelis make for the sake of the Jewish homeland, of the protection of the land that we all call ours. Do we think about the psychological stresses of raising children who will go into the army? Or the anguish of parents whose children are in combat units or in the reserves? Or of grandparents who have been through it all and now will do it all over again when their grandchildren come of age? This is something I can appreciate, having had a son in an IDF combat unit. But even with my experience, I can never fully appreciate the silent and ever-present scream in the pit of the stomach of every Israeli whose child will serve. Do we in the Diaspora add this to the economic stress of the middle class who are struggling to hang  on to their gains but see themselves backsliding into the working poor? Or to the pain of knowing that despite the extraordinary joie de vivre of Israelis, the strength and solidarity of purpose they live, that the fear and pain of loss of a child coupled with the fear of losing one’s economic foothold can simply be too much?

We are all wonderful armchair analysts. Some of us still talk about Samaria and Judea as ours. After all, we gave back Gaza and what did it get for us? Others among us support giving up the West Bank and East Jerusalem. We have the luxury of speculating about what is right and wrong with policies and governments. We are polarized over the issues of land for peace, peace negotiations, etc. So we were taken aback when in the weeks leading to the elections in Israel peace was off the radar in some political circles. We are surprised with the outcome giving a Yair Lapid such power, considering that this election was his first foray into politics. We, in fact, simply didn’t understand what is at stake in Israel and what the election said about Israeli society.

As I left Israel last week, I left the complex land I would like to call home one day somewhat saddened and worried for my friends. We need Israel and Israel needs us – not only in times of war or in times of peace. Always.

Ongoing debate questions whether minorities are paying the price in Quebec’s debate over the place of religion.

Israel isn’t the only Western country debating the relationship between religion and the state. In fact, this is becoming one of the hottest issues across Europe and North America, brought to the forefront by changing demographics in the West: its social make-up becoming more and more multicultural, multi-ethnic and multi-religious.

Canada is certainly not immune, especially its French-speaking province of Quebec. The latest example is the debate over the Quebec government’s decision to soon table a “Charter of Secularism,” with the purported goal of clarifying the rules of a society that is becoming more and more religiously diverse.

Sadly, the current government’s approach suggests that any public expression of a minority religion is seen by many – including by some influential figures of the current Quebec government – as an encroachment by religion on the public sphere, whereas any Catholic manifestation is said to be part of Quebec’s heritage.

Last week, the minister responsible for the Charter of Secularism, Bernard Drainville, said that he considered the temporary waiver of restrictions on street parking in a district of Montreal during Shavuot “privileged treatment.” He appeared on numerous TV and radio shows across the province, repeating in interview after interview that this eminently modest exception was unacceptable. His view was echoed by many populists, happy to denounce this “privilege” given to the Jews.

The Jewish community of Quebec was united in its outrage over the troubling on-air insinuations. Eric Maldoff, president of the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs (Quebec), captured the indignation of local Jewry: “Politicians and the media have a duty to ensure that the political and societal debate on secularism does not denigrate, nor stigmatize the Jewish community of Quebec, which has lived in Quebec while respecting its laws and social norms for two and a half centuries.”

We never heard Minister Drainville when Catholic churches across the province organized “Marches of Forgiveness” on Good Friday, during which streets are closed and police officers are on duty for hours while Catholic parishioners re-enact the 12 stations of the cross. Dozens of municipalities in Quebec have customized parking regulations for Christmas and Easter, to ensure people are not ticketed on those special days.

But when a benign act of neighborliness benefits a minority – here the Jewish community – similar treatment becomes unacceptable. Populist sentiments were fired up by an elected minister at the expense of the Jewish community. Drainville continues to claim that the Charter of Secularism will alleviate social divisions and yet, with his remarks, he effectively intensified those very tensions.

The Francophones’ situation in North America is precarious, representing only two percent of the North American population (about the same number as Jews, and we are all well acquainted with the challenge of assimilation within that community).

French Quebec is situated beside the most powerful linguistic and cultural (not to mention political, economic and military) hegemon in modern history.

Given this reality, some fears regarding group continuity are normal, if not healthy.

To my knowledge, Quebec is the only society that is both a minority enclave and a high immigration society. According to an official report produced following hearings on reasonable accommodations for minority groups written by widely respected intellectuals Charles Taylor and Gérard Bouchard, since the end of the 1940s, Quebec has consistently been one of the top 10 industrialized societies in terms of per capita immigration.

Having twice rejected independence in referendums (1980 and 1995), while not fully buying into a broader pan-Canadian vision, Quebeckers are debating who they are, what their society stands for, and what ultimately constitutes their core values. The relationship between state and religion does indeed need to be clarified in view of the massive changes Quebeckers are experiencing. There needs to be separation – and clarification – between the two spheres.

And of course secularism cannot be built on a tabula rasa. A society is not a blank canvas. It comes with a history and a personality. While Quebec is now the least religious society in North America, historically there is no doubt that it was highly influenced by the Catholic Church.

However, if one considers any expression of religion acceptable as long as it is Catholic but unacceptable if it is Jewish (or any other minority religion), one will logically diminish the rights of minorities – a prospect most Quebeckers would surely view as abhorrent. Secularism should not be used as an instrument to encourage minorities to obscure their traditions (which, by and large, are entirely compatible with a modern pluralistic democracy) and simply disappear.

Catholicism has unquestionable deep cultural and historical roots in Quebec, something the Jewish community has always accepted. I would not dream of calling for the removal of the iconic cross from Montreal’s Mount Royal or change the names of numerous towns and villages that bear Catholic saints’ names. However, it is crucial that the same rules apply for all public expressions of faith.

Jews have been in Quebec for more than 250 years. They belong to Quebec. They are part of Quebec. After a quarter millennia, Judaism is also a significant part of Quebec.

The debate going on in Quebec is a preview of what other high-immigration Western societies will likely go through. While it is of course legitimate to debate the place of religion in any society, no such discussion should be used to score political points at the expense of minorities. To do so is to play a very dangerous game.

The author is general counsel and a senior government adviser for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs.

It takes an accomplished writer to cover, in under 800 words, as much terrain as concisely and effectively as Robert Fulford did in his May 11 National Post column “The ‘rabid’ rage of Israel’s enemies.”

As he’s shown time and again, Fulford is indeed just that rare sort of wordsmith and thinker.

In this case, he asked what gives with the Toronto Star’s Haroon Siddiqui calling Stephen Harper’s pro-Israel position “rabid.” After all, as Fulford notes, Harper is quite cool and calm, including about Israel. Siddiqui is anything but. As Fulford put it, Siddiqui exemplifies a type for whom “a furious opposition to Israel has become a sacred duty.” Accordingly, obsessing about and bashing Israel to the exclusion of any other foreign policy issue provides “intellectual comfort and self-satisfaction.”

Labelling someone who defends Israel as the only liberal democracy (however imperfect) as “rabid” is, at bottom, really just a statement about the labeller.

Yet Fulford aims far beyond Siddiqui to encompass a surprising amount of detail concerning the pervasive, toxic intellectual climate today in major Western and other circles concerning Israel. This includes everything from the UN to academia, to boycott movements and protests against Israel, whether from groups like Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) or from individuals such as, sadly, famed physicist Stephen Hawking.  Recently, Hawking unthinkingly caved in to anti-Israel pressure from what he called “Palestinian academics” in deciding to boycott this year’s President’s conference in Jerusalem.

Needless to say, it’s best just to read Fulford’s column in full. For the moment, however, let the following passage from his piece about the obsessive singling out of, and ganging up on, Israel serve as a reminder of what else awaits the reader: “In North America or Europe, holding this position demonstrates an absurd thoughtlessness. It implies that we should punish Israel, the only real democracy in the Middle East, while ignoring Syria, Iran, North Korea, China, and many other despotic states. This is a remarkable but widespread form of blindness.”

***

On the subject of Hawking, Fulford pointed out that the physicist had no second thoughts visiting dictatorships like Iran and China.

In an article for the Jerusalem Post’s May 12 Magazine, the well-known Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz expanded on this very issue:

“The only logical conclusion that can be derived from Stephen Hawking’s decision to join the academic boycott of Israel, coupled with his enthusiastic visits to Iran and China, is that he actively endorses and supports the repression practiced by the Iranian mullahs and the Chinese party bosses. Why else would he single out the world’s only Jewish state for his academic boycott?

“Prior to the cancellation of his academic talk in Israel, it might have been argued that his visits to Iran and China reflected not support for the regimes but rather a neutral approach to academics, or a refusal to participate in academic boycotts. No longer can this justification work. The only possible justification for distinguishing between Israel on the one hand and Iran and China on the other hand would be if Israel’s actions were worse than those of Iran and China. Only a knave or a fool would believe that to be so.”

The contrast couldn’t be starker, as Dershowitz explains. Israel’s academies not only encourage free debate, political dissent thrives. Just the opposite prevails in Iran’s “repressive theocracy”: “Dissenters are not given tenure; they are murdered, after first being tortured.” The academic situation in China is better than in Iran, yet there is no real freedom of thought and dissidents are persecuted.

Nonetheless, Hawking “limited his boycott to the democratic nation state of the Jewish people.”

Dershowitz argues that in singling out Israel, “[t]he burden is now on Steven Hawking to justify on the face of what looks like a double standard, hypocrisy and bigotry.”

As with Fulford’s column, do yourself a favour and read Dershowitz’s article in full. They fittingly go together.

Paul Michaels is the Director of Research and Media Relations for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs.

For past “According to Reports” click here

The exhibit tells the story of Jewish life in Canada throughout our nation’s history. From the very first Jewish settlement, to the establishment of communities of all sizes and in multiple locations, the exhibit chronicles the activities and contributions that went beyond the Jewish community to influence Canada’s evolution as a country.
This exhibit was over a year in the making and includes photos from a number of sources, including the Jewish Public Library Archives and Canadian Jewish Congress’ Charities Committee National Archives.

The exhibit is currently on display in Toronto from May 1 through June 21.  Viewing hours are as follow:

Wednesdays from 1 to 5 p.m.
Thursday from 1 to 7 p.m.
Fridays from 1 to 3 p.m.
Sundays from 1 to 7 p.m.

If you find yourself in the Toronto area, we encourage you to visit Jews – A Canadian Story in Pictures. It promises to captivate your attention and give you pause about our nation’s rich Jewish history. If you’re interested in hosting this exhibition, please contact us at info@cija.ca

Please note the exhibit is available in both English and French. Veuillez noter que cette exposition est disponible en français et en anglais.

To learn more about the exhibit, please click here.

“Iranian state media has reported that a mere eight of the 686 people who registered as presidential candidates for the upcoming election have passed the regime’s ideological vetting and been approved to stand. This absurd result further demonstrates how deeply this bankrupt regime distrusts and fears its own people—even its own supporters.

“The Iranian people deserve to have their voices heard. They deserve a genuine and meaningful choice. The clerical, military dictatorship of Ayatollah Khamenei continues to stifle fundamental democratic freedoms by censoring media and silencing open and democratic debate. The regime’s vast system of domestic repression through politically motivated arrests, imprisonments and threats of retribution against those who express dissenting views, at the hands of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps-Basij, is unacceptable.

“Canada challenges the regime to have the courage to face the aspirations of the Iranian people. Canada stands as a friend of the Iranian people and calls on Ayatollah Khamenei’s regime to open up, roll back the apparatus of fear and stop denying Iranians their basic human rights.”

- 30 -

JERUSALEM — A leading Israeli university says it will present singer Barbra Streisand with an honorary Ph.D. when she visits Israel next month.

The Hebrew University of Jerusalem said Monday it was granting the singer the degree because of her concern for human rights and dedication to Israel and the Jewish people.

Streisand, 71, is expected to perform at a June conference in honor of the 90th birthday of Israeli President Shimon Peres. She will also appear in two public concerts. It will be the first time the Jewish singer performs in Israel.

The university’s school of Jewish studies, established in 1984, is named after Streisand’s father, Emanuel. Streisand also holds an honorary doctorate in Arts and Humanities from Brandeis University in the U.S.

::Huffington Post

::The Toronto Star
Vivian Bercovici

Intellectuals’ anti-Israel campaign is a worrisome portent for liberalism, democracy and free thought.

Photo Credit: Ted S. Warren / AP

It’s a bit like an Israeli Davos.

Much ink has been spilled in the last two weeks about the meaning of it all. The viewpoints have been well-covered by others writing from every perspective possible.

Vivian Bercovici is a Toronto lawyer and professor with a postgraduate diploma in Mideast politics. Her column appears monthly.

Many of you are aware that while our community was celebrating Shavuot, Quebec Minister of Democratic Institutions, Bernard Drainville, made unacceptable remarks in respect of the decades old practice in certain boroughs of “parking tolerance” on Jewish holidays, waiving restrictions on street parking for a few blocks around synagogues.  (The gesture allows practicing Jews who do not drive on holidays to avoid tickets if they are unable to move their cars when a holiday coincides with a day designated for street-sweeping.)  Drainville characterized the practice as an unreasonable accommodation to the Jewish community, deploring those who “seek privileges and exonerations from the law”.

CIJA our advocacy agent, was immediately in touch with the Premier’s office, as well as Minister Drainville’s office and the management of Cogeco (owner of Radio 98,5, on which some of the remarks were made) to express our community’s outrage and demanding an apology.  We are expecting responses today.  CIJA was also directly in touch with Philippe Couillard and Francois Legault.
Click here to read the press release from CIJA condemning the incident, which will be issued shortly.

While it may at times appear as though Federation CJA is silent in the face of incidents such as this one, it is important to understand that CIJA is constantly monitoring the entire landscape and taking action behind the scenes, often before members of our community are even aware of an instance of anti-Semitism.  CIJA Quebec, ably chaired by Eric Maldoff, C.M., with a lay board and cadre of capable professionals, has strong and enduring relationships at all levels of provincial and federal government, and across all political parties.  We at Federation CJA rely heavily on their counsel to determine whether, and if so how and when to react to expressions of anti-Semitism or anti-Zionism, with the ultimate objective of defending our communal interests in the most effective way possible.

Following Drainville’s comments there has been critical coverage in English media in Quebec, in French media on the Journal de Montréal’s website, and nationally.  We would refer you, in particular, to two pieces: (1) a National Post article summarizing the incident, and (2) an excellent blog posted on the Journal de Montréal’s website, by Lise Ravary:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/05/15/pq-minister-takes-aim-at-jewish-parking-exemption-in-apparent-attempt-to-inflame-voters

http://blogues.journaldemontreal.com/liseravary/actualites/tous-les-accommodements-ne-sont-pas-egaux/#.UZUlcN_FMYV.twitter

Federation CJA, through CIJA, continues to monitor the political and media landscape and will always react in the most timely and effective way to advance and protect our community’s interests. We will keep you posted on further developments on this file through updates on our website: www.federationcja.org.

David J. Cape President

Deborah Corber, LL.M. Chief Executive Officer

Dozens of municipalities in Quebec employ the same type of measures for public and civic holidays. However, Minister Drainville has blown out of proportion this benign act of neighborliness which traditionally benefits all groups, Jewish or not, in order to promote his bill for the “secular charter” at the expense of the Jewish community.

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) is saddened and outraged by the demagogic remarks made by Minister Drainville. While it is legitimate to debate the place of religion in our society, this discussion must include all minority groups in Quebec, and should not be used to score political points at their expense.

“We are profoundly disappointed that during his radio interview with Benoit Dutrizac, Minister Drainville failed to refute the outrageous remarks made by Mr. Dutrizac with regards to the Jewish community of Quebec. It should be noted that Mr. Dutrizac has already been blamed by the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council in 2012, for the « abusive and unduly discriminatory remarks about Jewish people » he made at the time of the controversy over Hampstead by-laws on noise during Jewish and other holidays,” declared Luciano G. Del Negro, Vice-President (Quebec) for CIJA.

Minister Drainville, whose role it is to represent the entire population of Quebec, should have categorically rejected the scandalous remarks made by Dutrizac, yet instead, he suggested that the Jewish community is a source of conflict, and by their actions, are a source of resentment. Minister Drainville even went so far as to congratulate Dutrizac at the end of the interview, and praised him for his work.

The conduct and words of Minister Drainville are unbecoming of a minister charged with the responsibility for our democratic institutions. He seems unaware that democracy depends on mutual respect, tolerance and generosity of spirit. The Minister claims that the “secular charter” will alleviate social tensions, yet instead, his remarks have intensified them. Minister Drainville should apologize for his deliberate strategy to divide Quebecers, when instead, Quebecers should be brought together. Premier Pauline Marois should call her minister to order.

Eric Maldoff, President of CIJA-Quebec added that “politicians and the media have a duty to ensure that the political and societal debate on secularism does not denigrate, nor stigmatize the Jewish community of Quebec, which has lived in Quebec while respecting its laws and social norms for two and a half centuries.”

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs is the official representative of Quebec’s organized Jewish community.

Information:

David Ouellette
Associate Director, Public Affairs (Québec)
douellette@cija.ca

Discrimination and violence against the LGBTQ community represents a threat to the values we all cherish as Canadians, including the fundamental right of every person to live in freedom and without fear of persecution. We are heartened that both Canada and Israel have taken substantial measures to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the workplace, military, the adoption process, and provide equal recognition for same-sex marriages.

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs stands with our friends in the LGBTQ community in the ongoing fight against homophobia and transphobia along with all forms of racism, bigotry and discrimination.